Are Humans basically good? (Page 2)

That's what you got out of that???

There's a huge leap between "I would steal food for survival" and "I'm only good as long as I can justify it".  Very few people would choose starvation over sticking to their values and not stealing food.  I used that example to make a case for my belief that people are not inherently good or bad, and many of the values we consider to be determinants of good and bad are actually rules necessary for civilization to exist.  Put people in a situation where survival is on the line, and I think most would adopt a different set of values to determine what was good or bad.  i.e.  for most people, stealing is always wrong in the world we live in, but in a situation where it was necessary for survival, I believe most people would consider it acceptable.

Agree with the posts above. I don't think any of us are too far away from doing something we currently deem as unthinkable. Given the right set of circumstances our self interest can change drastically and thus our actions. At our core we want to survive when the chips are really down.

But that brings up another interesting point. Anyone here would say they would die for their spouse or kids. But how is that self interested if the self ends up dead? IMO this still works based on self image. If someone has a gun to my wife and I and they have one bullet and give me the choice of who gets it I will choose myself. Personally I deem it better for myself to die than to have to live with having chosen for my wife to die instead of me. Others may deem survival as their ultimate best interest and choose the other to die. Now you have the same situation with me and a serial killer, what will my choice be then? Am I bad if I chose the other person? Am I good if I chose myself? It all comes down to self interest, if I can live with the other person dying and me living I chose them, if I would rather not live with that choice I chose myself. 

Not trying to argue with you on it cause I would do the same thing. I am just saying at that point I could justify my actions into it being a good thing vs. a bad thing

I think most of us are hardwired along the lines of these priorities:

Survival of the species > Survival of our genes > Survival of self

Exactly!

That's not how I use the word "justify".  If it's justified, that doesn't turn something bad into good, it's just is a reason to do bad.

If I stole bread to keep from starving, it's still wrong, but it's a viable reason/justification.  I would know it's wrong but feel that to keep from starving, I chose to do wrong.

In general, I think right is right and wrong is wrong good is good and bad is bad (I realize everyone's definition may vary some).  Just having a reason/justification to do "wrong", doesn't make it "right".

I don't think killing is right.  Never will.  But I will defend myself or my family or nation by killing if I had to.  I might have a reason/justification, but I still don't think it's good/right to kill.

I agree with you completely, however the duration required for survival was very small.  As time goes by without assistance the level of civility will go down as the desperation goes up.

Fortunately we live in America and it's hard to think of a scenario, natural or man made, that would take us out of the short duration survival need.  So for the most part you are correct and people will be completely civil (with exception of the idiots).

If you take those same people that lost everything and then don't give them any food, water, or shelter for two months I suspect you may see a slightly different outcome from them.  I guarantee you that people aren't going to just sit in the rain and watch their kids starve to death.

I just try to look past the rainbows and unicorns

It just depends how deep you want to look into the question.  In America even most bad people are generally good because of our civil structure.  So in effect, yes everyone is basically good.  But that's only if we look at the surface.

Remove the police and all the laws on the books, I suspect we'd start to shift in another direction over time.  Now granted everyone grew up with civility, so it's not like everyone would run the streets with machete's the day laws were removed.

I think it's just an interesting academic question to ponder because there's no real way to know.  I think there will always be some form of "civil structure" in place no matter what.  If you took away all laws and such, you'd have either well armed or strong willed people taking over and imposing their civil structure likely by force to keep order.  From the smallest tribe in the jungle to the largest countries there's always somebody in charge.

You make the mistake of ascribing to the equation self interest = bad. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being self interested and in fact is the only reason society works. As I explained earlier everyone who "helped out so much during Sandy" as you say, was in fact acting in their own self interest. Whether it was to rebuild their community so as to protect their way of life or to feel good about themselves or to gain the respect, admiration and feeling of community with their neighbors everyone was at the core of it acting in their best self interest as they saw it. Looters were doing the same, they just had a different definition of self interest. 

Again, the word selfish has gotten a bad rap and has a negative stigma that it does not deserve. There is nothing wrong with acting in one's own best self interest. Like was said earlier it is in one's interest to preserve self, then one's gene pool, then one's community. You admit yourself that given enough time in a disaster situation a community will become less important, at that point your family is your main concern, as your family dies off your own survival is your last interest. Self interest works great until the survival of these things is called into question.

I know, some of this stuff is pretty funny.  The right thing will always be the right thing, no matter what it costs. That doesn't change with whatever conditions you may be faced with.  If it does, you're living wrong by my way of thinking. By taking care of other people you ARE taking care of yourself....but you can't separate the two.

In my own life I have not always done the right thing.....but I work on it and I understand it better now....especially the consequences of not doing what's right.  I believe that's true for most people, which is why I have seen so much more good than bad from folks while spending the majority of my life around some pretty heinous situations.